Research on Madrid 2004 Bombing
Introduction
The Madrid attack in 2004 in Spain involved bombing of various commuter trains targeting thousands of people making their way to work. The explosion involving 10 bombs occurred on t4 trains that were heading to Madrid killing people and another 1,800 sustained injuries. Initially, the Spanish authorities blamed the attack on Eta a separatist group from Basque Country but the group vehemently denied any involvement in the incident. An investigation carried out by police later on and ensuing trial unearthed no evidence that could link the attack to the group. The investigation later designated Islamic Militants as the major suspects in the bombings. The attacks were identified through investigation of various exhibits remaining at the scene.
Discussion
The investigation into the attack was a complex and extensive one consisting of standard forensic tests and DNA analysis, with the later mainly aimed at supporting the former (Phillips et al. 2009). The forensic tests were done on over 600 exhibits majorly comprising of contract traces including detonated IEDs fragments, the suspect vehicles, personal items at the train station or from the suspects' houses and an IED that never exploded (Phillips et al. 2009). The FBI also formed part of the team of officers investigating the attack. The anti-terrorism police officers were involved in the investigation and apprehending the suspects. The police raided the suspects' apartment where they collected the exhibits for investigation and also apprehended some of the suspects during the raids. At the time, a letter sent to an Arabic newspaper based in London claimed that Abu Hafs al-Masri, a militant group associated with al-Qaeda network, was responsible for the attack even though the accuracy of such claim could not be proved (Hamilos, 2007). Al-Qaida also claimed to be responsible for the attack through a video purporting to be from the spokesman of the group in Europe (Hamilos, 2007). The investigation led to arrest of various men in connection with a cell phone the police found in the backpack that had the undetonated explosive. In 2007, 21 individuals accused of belonging to terrorist groups were found guilty of involvement in the bombings by a court in Spain (Barrett, 2008).
The terrorist group placed 10 bombs on 4 separate trains which were then detonated. The bombs involved 14 explosive devices that had been developed and placed in various sports bags and rucksacks. The terrorist then placed these bags on trains at Acala de Henares (Sciolino, 2004). There was also a van that appeared to have been used in the planning of the attack since it consisted of documents written in Arabic and also a tape of Koran readings referring to childhood education. The attacks were coordinated since they happened nearly simultaneously with the trains being the target. It happened in the morning starting at 7:37 and going on for the next few minutes (Hamilos, 2007). The attacked trains were using the same line and heading in the same direction. Further reports indicated that 14 IEDs had been planted on these trains and the team tasked with disposing of bombs arrived at the scene and detonated the remaining one in a controlled explosion. Another explosive device was found in the evening (Sciolino, 2004). They were also carried out three days to Spain's general elections and the planners appeared to have aimed to influence the political environment in the country. Even though only the 10 of the bombs exploded, they caused massive destruction including financial costs of over 2000 Mm Euros (Hamilos, 2007). The number of victims in this incident was larger than any other such attack in the country and was even the worst bomb attack in Europe at the time (Hamilos, 2007).
The terrorists chose to attack the trains most likely because of thousands of potential victims of the bombing especially in the morning when many people were commuting to their workplaces. By maximizing the impacts of the attack, the terrorist would get the publicity and fame they wanted. The timing of these attacks especially in the morning and just before the general elections in the country clear indicates the intent of the terrorist (Dannenbaum, 2011). The country lagged behind in terms of radical Islamists irrespective of the fact that it had experienced prior attacks specifically from the ETA separatist group (Byman, 2005). Spain's proximity to North Africa, its historical association with Islam and open policy to immigration made it a transit point and hub for radical and terrorist groups before (Byman, 2005). The terrorists found a chance to exploit the country's unpreparedness to prevent or control terrorism, with few security officers and financial resources allocated for this purpose. There were terrorist threats and warnings that the government ignored and failed to take any action.
In fact among the terrorists who had been arraigned in court, there were many with terrorist history and others were known as terrorists connected with some terrorists before (Byman, 2005). There was an opportunity for the group to influence the coming elections through bombings, a practice that had previously been employed by the al-Qaida terror group. The strategic aspects of the attack were derived from more experienced terrorists especially the al-Qaida. The attack was, therefore, intended to be a shocking surprise to the country and others in Europe at the time of elections. They knew that the authorities underestimated the threat they posed or their capabilities and this led to the situation. The security apparatus and intelligence community had generally underrated the local Islamists while placing too much focus on the operations of ETA and thus failed to regard the risk posed by the Islamists (Byman, 2005).
Moreover, there is a prominent argument that the 2004 Madrid attack suspects had been radicalized due to the invasion of Iraq by the United States in 2003. There were about five individuals from the network of the responsible group who had been radicalized due to the Iraq invasion and these were part of the criminals who were being led by Jamal Ahmidan (Reinares, 2009). These individuals embraced the violent ideology during this time and others could have been radicalized after attacks of 9/11 in New York and the following military actions in Afghanistan. Spanish ruling government had clearly supported the United States in the invasion of Iraq but the opposition had strongly opposed the decision (Reinares, 2012). The radicalized individuals associated with the terror groups were presented with an opportunity to influence the election to be held if only to help the opposition to replace the sitting government. The association with al-Qaida could have made the individuals be Islamic radicals especially those from North America and would have desired to attack the train station and thus mark their presence among other groups (Reinares, 2012).
The heightened investigation by police involved DNA analysis and forensic tests on the exhibits that remained at the stations including the personal items, the devices left at the van and the explosive device that failed to go off. The court had ordered the collection of samples from the relatives of suspects who were missing and for whom the international warrants of arrests had been given (Phillips et al. 2009). The aim was to assist in identifying the DNA match with samples that had collected near the locations that were closely linked with the suspects. It was also determined that attackers boarded these trains together at the same time and station (Reinares, 2012). Some of the bombs failed to explode and this played a big role in helping the investigators to discover the group within a short time. The attackers had not scattered and remained together in one place which made it possible for the investigators to identify them. With the DNA and forensic results obtained at the scene, the investigators were able to follow some links to the suspects' houses. The officers were able to search their houses and arrested some suspects while others blew themselves up in their houses after they were corned so as to avoid the impending arrests.
Conclusion
The 2004 Madrid attack was perpetrated by some Islamist radicals from North America who were associated with the al-Qaida terrorist group. They saw Spain as a major target to attack given the country's support for the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and wanted to use this to draw international attention and make a political point in the country. The group succeeded in executing the attacks and greatly attracted the attention of European countries leading to the adoption of various anti-terror measures. The attack also influenced the outcome of the general election as then government that had support the Iraq campaign lost to the opposition that had opposed the invasion.
References
Sciolino, E. (2004). 10 Bombs Shatter Trains in Madrid, Killing 192. The New York Times, 1-1. Retrieved from: https://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/12/world/bombings-in-madrid-the-attack-10-bombs-shatter-trains-in-madrid-killing-192.html
Hamilos, P. (2007). The worst Islamist attack in European history. The Guardian, 31.
Barrett, J. (2008). Court finds 21 guilty of Madrid train bombings. Reuters, May, 27, 174-179.
Reinares, F. (2009). Jihadist Radicalization and the 2004 Madrid Bombing Network. CTC Sentinel, 2(11), 16-19.
Reinares, F. (2012). The Evidence of Al-Qaida's Role in the 2004 Madrid Attack. CTC sentinel, 5(3), 1-6.
Byman, D. (2005). Strategic surprise and the September 11 attacks. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci., 8, 145-170.
Dannenbaum, T. (2011). Bombs, ballots, and coercion: The Madrid bombings, electoral politics, and terrorist strategy. Security Studies, 20(3), 303-349.
Phillips, C., Prieto, L., Fondevila, M., Salas, A., Gómez-Tato, A., Álvarez-Dios, J., ... & Carracedo, Á. (2009). Ancestry analysis in the 11-M Madrid bomb attack investigation. PLoS One, 4(8), e6583.
